ArticleBioscience reports2021
Bioactive cationic peptides as potential agents for breast cancer treatment.
Article in Bioscience reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enhanced anticancer efficacy ofMaterials today. Bio · 2026Article
- Frog Skin Peptides: Nature's Dual-Action Weapons Against Infection and Cancer.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Peptide Fractions Extracted from the Hemolymph ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Biological Activity of Peptide Fraction Derived fromInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Cationic antimicrobial peptides: potential templates for anticancer agents.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Review
- Antimicrobial and antitumor properties of anuran peptide temporin-SHf induce apoptosis in A549 lung cancer cells.Amino acids · 2024Article
- ΔM4: Membrane-Active Peptide with Antitumoral Potential against Human Skin Cancer Cells.Membranes · 2023Article
- The role of peptides in reversing chemoresistance of breast cancer: current facts and future prospects.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Breast cancer continues to affect millions of women worldwide, and the number of new cases dramatically increases every year. The physiological causes behind the disease are still not fully understood. One in every 100 cases can occur in men, and although the frequency is lower than among women, men tend to have a worse prognosis of the disease. Various therapeutic alternatives to combat the disease are available. These depend on the type and progress of the disease, and include chemotherapy, radiotherapy, surgery, and cancer immunotherapy. However, there are several well-reported side effects of these treatments that have a significant impact on life quality, and patients either relapse or are refractory to treatment. This makes it necessary to develop new therapeutic strategies. One promising initiative are bioactive peptides, which have emerged in recent years as a family of compounds with an enormous number of clinical applications due to their broad spectrum of activity. They are widely distributed in several organisms as part of their immune system. The antitumoral activity of these peptides lies in a nonspecific mechanism of action associated with their interaction with cancer cell membranes, inducing, through several routes, bilayer destabilization and cell death. This review provides an overview of the literature on the evaluation of cationic peptides as potential agents against breast cancer under different study phases. First, physicochemical characteristics such as the primary structure and charge are presented. Secondly, information about dosage, the experimental model used, and the mechanism of action proposed for the peptides are discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.